Chances are very good that if you have to carry firewood on your head to your lean-to, this website never reaches you. You have more pressing needs than intellectual stimulation, needs, such as, well, survival stuff like making it through this day to reach tomorrow’s struggle for existence. On a drive from Guatemala City to Antigua Guatemala, I saw a woman walking along the roadside and carrying a few thick branches of firewood on her head. She wasn’t participating in some “iron man” contest. No, the contest was between her daily survival with the luxury of cooked food and the threat of her minimal existence. I might have offered her a ride to ease her burden, but in a culture that views foreigners who approach villagers as potential kidnappers, I felt that practical wisdom was expedient. * I drove on, knowing that trying to help might have been wrongly interpreted. And I know that even though I am aware of her life, because she never saw me, she has never been aware of mine. I ponder the quality of her life; she never ponders the quality of mine, and she will never read what I post in this website.
At some time, all of us recognize a difference in life’s so called “quality.” Some have more; some, less. In some cases, some have nothing but life itself. So, why mention the obvious, why say some are poor and others, rich? Poverty is pervasive unless it isn’t.
As a resident of Penn’s Woods, that is, Pennsylvania, I’m surrounded by more than 17 million acres of trees. I’m used to seeing an abundance of firewood and also to seeing it delivered by the cords to residences large and small and urban and rural. An abundance of and easy delivery of firewood isn’t a normal “quality of life” indicator. In most American homes, firewood is a nonessential. Stoves and furnaces run on transported supplies of natural gas and electricity. The “quality of life” factor for many lies in having a fireplace or wood stove as an amenity, even a sign of luxury, an object unnecessary for survival, but one indicative of casual affluence, and a great background for having a glass of wine or a cup of tea. Women traipsing for miles with firewood on their heads just to cook a meagre meal don’t make a common sight in the United States.
That brings me to a question I have to ask myself: What do I consider to be essential for defining “quality of life”?
I do know that humans have tendencies to make do with what they have and that such making-do includes an emotional and intellectual kinship among people associated by necessity, as well as by love and friendship. Any consideration of life’s quality has to include intangibles. But what intangibles? And this where you come in with a contribution.
You say, “Didn’t you recently write a blog in which you quoted the late actor Tab Hunter, onetime heartthrob, as saying something about popularity’s not being important, whereas being a good person is?”
“Yes.”
“Well,” you continue, “I suppose you meant to say that being good has something to do with life’s quality and that being bad would be the antithesis of living a high-quality life. But that isn’t how some people might view life’s quality. Take a drug lord, for example, wouldn’t the power to control others, to bend their wills to his, be his fundamental component of high quality? Or, take a famous person who isn’t Tab Hunter, one who regards fame not as superfluous to his or her quality of life, but rather as essential to it. Such a hypothetical person isn’t the poster child for altruism, or charity, or love, or selflessness; yet, that person might say, ‘I’m living a high-quality life.’ And what of dictators, those deemed pathological liars or killers, and those who are bathed in unending praise by sycophants? Maybe there is no such thing as a life of high quality, and that what you center on in an argument based on a woman carrying wood on her head is merely a product of your own affluence-driven guilt.”
“Okay,” I say, “but could good mental and physical health constitute a high-quality of living?”
“It could,” you continue, “but there are many who in the midst of seeming good health and mental fitness, adopt a nihilism that leads in some cases to suicide. Surely, there are those who because of what you call intangibles just don’t find any kind of living to be high quality. Maybe those people just suffer from some existential angst that prohibits them from judging any life style, level, or means as unessential, even low quality, because, in the end, ennui wins and death is the leveler.”
“Gosh,” I say, “you’re depressing me. I have all this firewood for nothing, you say. Are my ideas of a high-quality life just the defense mechanisms I use to ward off thinking about the inevitable? A drug lord can live a high-quality life whereas those under him live various levels of poor-quality lives that are little different from the wood-carrying woman. But what if she’s very happy? What if carrying wood to sustain life is what makes a life high-quality?
“And that makes me wonder whether or not I should have stopped to offer assistance to the woman along the road regardless of my concern about others misinterpreting my act. Did I live a low-quality life in that moment because I drove on and failed to take Tab Hunter’s perspective that being a good person outweighs all other considerations, including wealth and personal safety?”
You reassuringly say, “You can’t solve all the world’s problems. Are you going to supply transportation and wood to the poor around the world? If you do help one lady, do you fail to help millions of others improve their lives, even if temporarily? Isn’t she responsible for defining her quality of life? Your helping her might yield temporary physical relief from her circumstance, but are you going to be there throughout her years? What happens when she burns through the wood she collected? You don’t live in Guatemala; you don’t have unlimited resources; you can’t ship some of Pennsylvania’s 17 million acres of trees cut and stacked in cords to her village. Remember the adage about giving a man a fish as opposed to teaching a man to fish. And besides, if you are discussing high-quality life, aren’t you equating it to a charitable life? Is charity what makes life high-quality? Are you adopting St. Paul’s philosophy, psychology, and sociology in which he concludes that of faith, hope, and charity, the ‘greatest of these is charity’? Caritas can be taken as love, you know. And one can love without giving others stuff, caring for their needs, and sacrificing one’s own wealth. Charity that makes life high-quality could be self-love as easily as it could be love of others.”
“Now, I’m questioning whether or not I made the right decision in asking for your comments. I’m more confused than ever. I don’t know if there even is such a thing as a high-quality life. Certainly, I haven’t defined it for myself. Am I just living episodically, living like some TV series junkie from week-to-week to see what’s next? Is ‘high-quality life’ a thing of the moment without some overarching meaning? Does it endure no longer than firewood? Is it something I have to go out daily to find just as the Guatemalan woman had to find her firewood? And is high-quality a changing principle, each day different because I burn wild cherry one day, oak another, and locust on a third day, gathering whatever logs are available at the time and at the least expenditure of money and energy? Does ease of acquisition equate to high-quality?”
“Sorry I couldn’t help,” you add. “I hope that you haven’t become pessimistic because you can’t define the quality of your life or the qualities of life. But, hey, keep trying. There are many trees in Penn’s Woods. Gather what you can, burn with some restraint, and share the warmth.”
*There is the story of Japanese tourists in Guatemala who wanted to take some pictures of village children. Seemed like an innocent act, except the villagers decided otherwise, saw it as a potential kidnapping, and killed at least one of the tourists.
At some time, all of us recognize a difference in life’s so called “quality.” Some have more; some, less. In some cases, some have nothing but life itself. So, why mention the obvious, why say some are poor and others, rich? Poverty is pervasive unless it isn’t.
As a resident of Penn’s Woods, that is, Pennsylvania, I’m surrounded by more than 17 million acres of trees. I’m used to seeing an abundance of firewood and also to seeing it delivered by the cords to residences large and small and urban and rural. An abundance of and easy delivery of firewood isn’t a normal “quality of life” indicator. In most American homes, firewood is a nonessential. Stoves and furnaces run on transported supplies of natural gas and electricity. The “quality of life” factor for many lies in having a fireplace or wood stove as an amenity, even a sign of luxury, an object unnecessary for survival, but one indicative of casual affluence, and a great background for having a glass of wine or a cup of tea. Women traipsing for miles with firewood on their heads just to cook a meagre meal don’t make a common sight in the United States.
That brings me to a question I have to ask myself: What do I consider to be essential for defining “quality of life”?
I do know that humans have tendencies to make do with what they have and that such making-do includes an emotional and intellectual kinship among people associated by necessity, as well as by love and friendship. Any consideration of life’s quality has to include intangibles. But what intangibles? And this where you come in with a contribution.
You say, “Didn’t you recently write a blog in which you quoted the late actor Tab Hunter, onetime heartthrob, as saying something about popularity’s not being important, whereas being a good person is?”
“Yes.”
“Well,” you continue, “I suppose you meant to say that being good has something to do with life’s quality and that being bad would be the antithesis of living a high-quality life. But that isn’t how some people might view life’s quality. Take a drug lord, for example, wouldn’t the power to control others, to bend their wills to his, be his fundamental component of high quality? Or, take a famous person who isn’t Tab Hunter, one who regards fame not as superfluous to his or her quality of life, but rather as essential to it. Such a hypothetical person isn’t the poster child for altruism, or charity, or love, or selflessness; yet, that person might say, ‘I’m living a high-quality life.’ And what of dictators, those deemed pathological liars or killers, and those who are bathed in unending praise by sycophants? Maybe there is no such thing as a life of high quality, and that what you center on in an argument based on a woman carrying wood on her head is merely a product of your own affluence-driven guilt.”
“Okay,” I say, “but could good mental and physical health constitute a high-quality of living?”
“It could,” you continue, “but there are many who in the midst of seeming good health and mental fitness, adopt a nihilism that leads in some cases to suicide. Surely, there are those who because of what you call intangibles just don’t find any kind of living to be high quality. Maybe those people just suffer from some existential angst that prohibits them from judging any life style, level, or means as unessential, even low quality, because, in the end, ennui wins and death is the leveler.”
“Gosh,” I say, “you’re depressing me. I have all this firewood for nothing, you say. Are my ideas of a high-quality life just the defense mechanisms I use to ward off thinking about the inevitable? A drug lord can live a high-quality life whereas those under him live various levels of poor-quality lives that are little different from the wood-carrying woman. But what if she’s very happy? What if carrying wood to sustain life is what makes a life high-quality?
“And that makes me wonder whether or not I should have stopped to offer assistance to the woman along the road regardless of my concern about others misinterpreting my act. Did I live a low-quality life in that moment because I drove on and failed to take Tab Hunter’s perspective that being a good person outweighs all other considerations, including wealth and personal safety?”
You reassuringly say, “You can’t solve all the world’s problems. Are you going to supply transportation and wood to the poor around the world? If you do help one lady, do you fail to help millions of others improve their lives, even if temporarily? Isn’t she responsible for defining her quality of life? Your helping her might yield temporary physical relief from her circumstance, but are you going to be there throughout her years? What happens when she burns through the wood she collected? You don’t live in Guatemala; you don’t have unlimited resources; you can’t ship some of Pennsylvania’s 17 million acres of trees cut and stacked in cords to her village. Remember the adage about giving a man a fish as opposed to teaching a man to fish. And besides, if you are discussing high-quality life, aren’t you equating it to a charitable life? Is charity what makes life high-quality? Are you adopting St. Paul’s philosophy, psychology, and sociology in which he concludes that of faith, hope, and charity, the ‘greatest of these is charity’? Caritas can be taken as love, you know. And one can love without giving others stuff, caring for their needs, and sacrificing one’s own wealth. Charity that makes life high-quality could be self-love as easily as it could be love of others.”
“Now, I’m questioning whether or not I made the right decision in asking for your comments. I’m more confused than ever. I don’t know if there even is such a thing as a high-quality life. Certainly, I haven’t defined it for myself. Am I just living episodically, living like some TV series junkie from week-to-week to see what’s next? Is ‘high-quality life’ a thing of the moment without some overarching meaning? Does it endure no longer than firewood? Is it something I have to go out daily to find just as the Guatemalan woman had to find her firewood? And is high-quality a changing principle, each day different because I burn wild cherry one day, oak another, and locust on a third day, gathering whatever logs are available at the time and at the least expenditure of money and energy? Does ease of acquisition equate to high-quality?”
“Sorry I couldn’t help,” you add. “I hope that you haven’t become pessimistic because you can’t define the quality of your life or the qualities of life. But, hey, keep trying. There are many trees in Penn’s Woods. Gather what you can, burn with some restraint, and share the warmth.”
*There is the story of Japanese tourists in Guatemala who wanted to take some pictures of village children. Seemed like an innocent act, except the villagers decided otherwise, saw it as a potential kidnapping, and killed at least one of the tourists.
RSS Feed